Pure flop bluffs in shorthanded . . .

[Bokonon]

One thing I can't wrap my head around is the correct play when there are only one or two other people in the pot, there's been no pre-flop raise, and I miss the flop completely.

There are a hundred possible examples, but let's try this one:

Folded to the button who calls. I call in the SB with J9. BB checks.

Flop comes K85 rainbow.

Now I know that there's a 50-50 shot that nobody else has hit the flop either. There's a king out there, but I do have two overcards to the 2nd card out there.

Do I bet? or check-fold?
What if they call and I miss the turn? Bet, or check-fold? Seems that a lot of people will call a flop bet and fold on the turn if they miss.
What if they call and I miss the river? Bet, or check-fold? Seems like a lot of players will wait around with any ace, and then fold if they've completely missed by the end. Or maybe their 4-flush didn't fill up, missed their straight, whatever.

Lately I've been check-folding from the beginning when I miss, and I can't help but think that being more aggressive would make me some $$.

Similar question applies for when I'm heads-up. I HATE betting into flops I've missed, but I also know that there's less than a 40% chance my opponent has hit, so check-folding just seems to be the epitome of weak-tight. On the other hand, betting every time on the flop, turn, and river seems pretty dumb as well.

Help?

[sweetjazz]

I'm fairly new to playing poker, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt. I don't have the experience to back up what my brain is telling me, and my brain has been known to fail me in the past...

But I have a similar dilemma as you, since I play in a shorthanded (at least for the moment) home game. I have been trying to check-fold hands that have very little chance of improving, but bet aggressively hands that have made and hands that have an extra chance of improving (e.g. if I am playing two suited cards and I catch a third on the flop).

While that slight improvement (e.g. potential for catching a back-door flush) is pretty minimal, the benefit is that it helps me moderate how often to bluff at the pot. It allows me to bluff a fair number of times, but I don't bluff at it everytime. This makes my bluff believable.

Another time to bluff at the pot is when you hold an Ace (or just a King if against a limper who raises a lot of his aces preflop). Now you know that if he missed too you actually have the best hand. So your bet is partly bluff, partly for value.

I agree with your observation that if you bet first-to-act after the flop and only get called, then usually you want to fire another shot on the turn. This works best against fairly solid players who are looking for implied odds by calling the SB after the flop. Beware the tricky player who will bluff-raise you at the right frequency when you bet again on the turn. The value of firing a second bet comes from knowing you can safely lay your hand down to a raise if you were being slowplayed or your opponent caught something on the turn.

Well those are just some thoughts of mine off the top of my head. Take them with a grain of salt, and I would greatly appreciate comments on my ideas, especially criticisms.

[stripsqueez]

my advice would be to appreciate that identifying the problem is 80% of the answer

[tewall]

If you have the Theory of Poker, it discusses this sort of play in several places in the book. If you don't have it, you should get it, as it will help in thinking about this and many other similar types of questions.

One suggestion is to break the bets down into streets and consider them independently. For example, in the first case, let's say there are 3 people seeing the flop and 6 small bets in the pot. If a bet by you will win the pot more than 1 times in 7, then it's a profitable bet. If that bet gets called, consider that as a separate problem.

Say it gets called by 1 person. Now there are 4 large bets in the pot, so if a bet by you will win the pot more than 1 time in 5, it's profitable.

You can handle the other possibilities similarly.

Here's another approach, which is similar. According to game theory, there are best uninformed bluffing (BUB) and calling (BUC) strategies, which means how you should bet/call to prevent an opponent from gaining an advantage against you with perfect play. That is, if he plays perfectly, he breaks even, but if he deviates, he loses. Once you get to know a player you can determine how he deviates from BUB or BUC. Take BUC. If he calls too often (which would be more than 1 times in P where P is the number of bets in the pot, when he has a hand that can only beat a bluff), then you should never bluff. If he folds too often, you should bluff as often as possible without causing him to change his strategy. This is considering the case heads up. With say 2 opponents, you could consider the two people as 1 and look at their combined probability of calling.

Changing the subject a bit, the particular situation you chose is an excellent one to bluff at. In general, Kxx is a good flop to bluff at, and in particular not only do you have a J or 9 to improve your hand, but a 6, 7, T or Q give you a straight draw. You could bet the flop and if called bet again on the turn if one of these cards fell.

[icepoker]

IMO, it totally depends on your opponents, in the example you presented, let's say the bb checks and the button bets, if you know him to be aggressive you can give up right there OR you can check-raise. The reason is that if he had something he would have raised preflop and he's not coming in with Kx without a raise. His preflop action eliminates 88 and 55 so he might have 67 and similarily 78 in which case you have outs and you let him sweat a little. The whole idea is to take it down right there, if bb calls and the button calls we have a problem and you need to improvise. If bb folds and button calls, you bet the turn regardless and prey. Check-folding too often in this situation is weak and gives you image problems.

The message is that if you're against people who are aggressive and bet when they don't have much you have to use every trick in the book and mix it up, with experience you'll find the correct ratio of when to do what. Of course if you're against people who only bet when they have it, the game becomes pretty simple.

[lefty rosen]

Mix up your bluffs, the most obvious bluff is the guy on the button who bets into a king or ace. Infact I always check my king or ace then crack the retardo who does this move 9/10 times he is bluffing......